See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/233520109

Research into, by and for design

Article  in  Journal of Visual Art Practice · November 2008

DOI: 10.1386/jvap.7.2.153_1

CITATIONS READS

41 2,431

1 author:

Ken Friedman
Tongji University
28 PUBLICATIONS   763 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

knowledge management View project

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/135281606000888703 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ken Friedman on 01 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Freud in French Poststructuralist Aesthetics

A Research Design

by

© PD Dr. Peter Mahr, Vienna 2007/2009

1 scientific aspects ............................................................ 1

1.1 international state of research ...................................... 1
1.2 breaking new ground scientifically ............................ 4
1.3 importance of expected results for the discipline ...... 19
1.4 methods .................................................................... 19
2 aspects implied for scientific community and beyond .. 21
3 list of literature relevant to project ................................ 21-28

1 scientific aspects

1.1 international state of research

This is a research design in philosophy, more precisely in philosophical aesthetics (50
% philosophy, 10 % aesthetics, 10 % history of science, 30 % psychoanalysis).
It is widely agreed upon today that aesthetics deals on the one side with the aesthetic
in terms of aesthetic qualities and the activity of aesthetic aisthesis (aesthetic
experience, attitude, judgment) and on the other side with the arts producing the
aesthetic (Zimmermann 1996, Gardner 1996, Genette 1997, Jimenez 1997, Scheer
1977, Mahr 2003, Reicher 2005). Equally acknowledged by now is the fact that
philosophical aesthetics entered a crisis already some hundred years ago when it
became apparent that the link between the two sides could not be founded on a
psychological basis as intended for some time (Burgin 1986, Carroll 1987, Sim 1992,
1
Mahr 1998c, Rancière 2002), moreover was undermined by psychological facts like
aesthetic anaesthesia, the aisthesis of disgust or the bodily subversion in language
(Mahr 2003a, 18f./22, 20f., 22f.). One of the few scholars drawing unintentionally
philosophical consequences from that crisis (Willy 1899, Bühler 1927, Mahr 1999d)
was Freud. What was his philosophy?
It does not come as a surprise that Freud’s philosophical suggestions, even ambitions
- from his student years until at least the 1890es - have been cleared by now as
philosophical, despite and in face of Freud’s increasing skepticism and final rejection
of philosophy in his later years (see Assoun 1976, 1981, 1993, Hemecker 1991,
Wucherer-Huldenfeld 1994a, Wucherer-Huldenfeld 1994b, Gödde 1999), as echoed
by all analytical, hermeneutic, sociological and phenomenological schools of
philosophy reading Freud (Wittgenstein 1967, MacIntyre 1958, Wollheim 1971,
Cavell 1993; Binswanger 1942, Boss 1957, Ricoeur 1965; Fromm 1931, Adorno
1951, Marcuse 1955; Dufrenne 1953 (Mahr <2001b>), for Sartre, Hippolyte,
Merleau-Ponty and phenomenology on psychoanalysis in general see Waldenfels
1983, 417-441, 468-474, and Mahr <2000a>). Anti-metaphysical in attitude toward
much of late 19th century academic philosophy, Freud advanced and at times even
radicalized certain parts of philosophical discourse: biologism if not physicalism,
albeit moderately; original and complex terminology as common to great philosophy;
the semi- or quasi-philosophical need for supplementing scientific research; shares in
philosophical disciplines like téchne rhetoriké (metapsychology, analytics,
topics/topology, an ethics of therapy by hypnosis, catharsis or self recognition); a
totalizing theoretical activity based on medicine, anthropology, social sciences and
the humanities (nosography, metapsychology, psychopathology/clinical psychology,
sexual/cultural/mass/art theory, critique/diagnosis of e. g. religion, general and
specialized journals); the autobiographical search for a discipline as common with
Augustine, Descartes, Rousseau, Kierkegaard or Nietzsche; the use of mixed method
as typical for some philosophy since Plato (Ricoeur 1965; compare Mahr <2002>)
fluctuating between hermeneutic, reductive, experimental, quantitative methods.
As for philosophical aesthetics or the philosophy of the arts, historical accounts
2
acknowledge Freud’s place on the map by now (Hauser 1958, Eagleton 1990,
Restaino 1991, Schneider 1996, Jimenez 1997 and already Listowell 1933).
Monographs in philosophical aesthetics focusing on Freud have given further
evidence to this fact (Kofman 1970, Kuhns 1983, Bersani 1986). This situation
encourages to conceive of a complex aesthetic theory and philosophy of the arts
considering Freudian contributions. To start with the fact that although sublimation is
absent from the theory of dreams, sublimation derivative of sexuality may be seen as
relative to dream work: as substitutive formation (parapraxis, jokes), compromise
formation, reaction formation. It may further be assumed even for Freud himself that
metapsychology nourished the hopes for arriving at more general conclusions
including the humanities and a fortiori aesthetic theory. In my forthcoming book
partly devoted to Freud’s psychological aesthetics, Freud’s psychoanalysis of
aesthetics and art is included, from a historical perspective toward philosophy, into
what I term there as „psychological philosophy“. This philosophical current may be
taken as specific for late 19th and early 20th century philosophy, for the continuous
transformation of metaphysical philosophy into sciences and humanities as is the case
with various kinds of empirical and experimental psychology and in particular with
what has become known as psychological aesthetics. Freud’s psychoanalysis belongs
to this area although, to some extent, it resists suspicions of falling under the verdict
of psychologism as used for seperating philosophy from psychology, one of the
points of departure both for phenomenology and analytical philosophy.
In any case, this conflictual feed, if perceived, remained strong in French philosophy
and aesthetics throughout the 20th century. To begin with, the first monograph about
Freud’s philosophical aesthetics (Kofman 1970) reveals an inspiration by then very
recent philosophy of Derrida, Foucault and Deleuze (the latter reflected by
psychoanalyst Green). As the titles of the their texts do not explicitly show their
authors’ occupation with Freud’s aesthetics, and as these are the only contemporary
philosophers referred to by Kofman, the question arises whether they themselves
dealt with Kofman’s subject matter. And, are they intrinsically linked to each other in
a more programmatical way?
3
Historiographically, they have been put under the umbrella term poststructuralism, a
term to be strengthened in showing the contributions that confront Freud. To be sure,
the frequent rejection of „structuralism“ or „poststructuralism“ by the authors named
may be understood all the more so as the prefix of „poststructuralism“ refers to a
determinate current of thought in the negative. No matter how different the
approaches of the individual representants may have been, „post structuralism“
means positions transgredient, after, yet relating to hermeneutics, phenomenology,
exstistentialism, Marxism, psychanalysm and of course structuralism. Philosophers
like Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida and, now adding to them, Kristeva, Irigaray, Kofman,
Baudrillard, Cixous share the spirit of the indirect structuralist „attack“ of Lévy-
Strauss, Lacan, Althusser and Barthes on traditional philosophical thought who drew
consequences from Saussurean linguistics in the fields of anthropology,
psychoanalysis, political economy or literary criticism. However, as these scholars
refrained from a systematical critique of philosophy, potential was left for philosophy
critiquing even one sided structuralism itself. At stake became, in post-metaphysical
terms, the search for decentered structures in the process of (un)making and
dependent from social and cultural context; a critique of the subject as applied to
history/power/desire as well as a return to the subject as an effect of identity in
difference (gender, class, belief); the fugitive sense of signs or works of art as an
effect of structures with awareness of its illusionary character like that of presence,
unity and form (Bloom 1975, Frank 1984, Münker/Rösler 2000, Belsey 2002,
Williams 2005, Schrift 2006).

1.2 breaking new ground scientifically

Selected as object of investigation are all early, i.e. French philosophical,
poststructuralist’s texts pertaining to Freud and aesthetic matters.
The early ones from 1965 through the 1970es because it is contended that these are
the most important and influential ones for today’s discussion in the field.
The French ones because they have been published as early until the mid-1970es, the
exception being late Foucault.
4
The philosophers’ approaches because they resulted in texts significant for a variety
of explicit and implicit references to Freud and philosophical aesthetics respectively.
Linguist, literary critic and psychoanalyst Kristeva is included here because of her
partly philosophical book 1974, her frequent philosophical references throughout her
work and her monograph on a philosopher (1999a; see Schmitz 2000). Irigaray’s
aesthetic including literary connections to her feminist philosophy frequently run
along Lacanian and Freudian psychoanalysis. And Kofman’s first philosophical
monograph about Freud‘s aesthetics is to be assumed as crucial for all what she has
later written in aesthetics and beyond. (Derrida fulfils the requirements although
rarely addressing philosophical, aesthetic topics directly and only drawing
consequences in distant writings. Foucault and Deleuze belong here because their
sometimes strong criticism of Freud contains aesthetic matters important to their own
conceptions of aesthetics and the philosophy of the arts. Lyotard is an aesthetician
right from the beginning of his philosophical comeback around 1970 whose not only
aesthetic publications are strongly influenced by Freud.)
To announce a breaking of new ground it is emphasized that until now these authors
have neither been assembled as poststructuralist philosophers, nor as readers of
Freud, nor as participants in the philosophy of aesthetics and the arts.
(As will be shown and may become evident from the date of the texts, a good deal of
them stem from the later 1960s until the early 1980es. For a better understanding,
some of Foucault’s and Deleuze’s early texts referring to Freud and aesthetics as well
as selected important texts of all major authors of later times will be included.)
(Not all poststructuralist thinkers bearing philosophical significance and interest in
Freud and aesthetics are included in full. Their texts will be consulted not just when
research leads to them. Literary critic Barthes is to be observed with his occasional
particular approach to psychoanalysis and despite his rejection of a desire/lust framed
by pleasure principle (1973), his seperation of Freud’s from Bachelard’s and Sartre’s
psychoanalysis on methodological purposes (1965) and his expressed relationship to
psychoanalysis as indifferent and not conscientious, for instance reflecting on a direct
proximity of erotics and aesthetics (1975). Sociological theoretician Baudrillard
5
belongs here because of his developing a psychoanalytic critique of Cartesian cogito
(1973), expanding on the notion of fetishism in Freud in order to claim that objects
today have become pure signs detached from use (1968), and commenting on the
aesthetics of Lyotard and Kristeva concerning jokes as requiring symbolic exchange,
besides references to Freud in non-aesthetic contexts (1976). Writer and
psychoanalysis historian Clément who was influenced by Lévi-Strauss and wrote two
books on aesthetics has critiziced psychoanalysis from a feminist point of view and
insisted on reactualizing it by imposing social functions (1975, 1978a, 1978b;
compare Turkle 1978). And against phallic dominance of writing, English studies
professor and writer Cixous has called, following the surrealists and Derrida, for a
body oriented écriture féminine explicitly conceiving of a liberation of women by
way of the aesthetic technique (1975; see also Mahr 2003, 92f.) with reference to
aesthetic aspects of Freudian theory time and again (1972, 1976a, 1976b, 2003).)
Also, texts will be taken notice of, when met in case by Nancy, Lacoue-Labarthe,
Ranciére, Badiou, Dolar and Zizek. The same applies to American poststructuralist
like de Man, Hartman (see his (ed.) 1978), Bloom, J.H. Miller, Culler, Krauss, Weber,
Ronell, Bolter, Wills, Butler, Rorty, Spivak, Jameson, Poster or Bersani. (What has
been published in the USA from the 1970es belongs to literary criticism includig
philosophical reflection in its widest sense and needed to be contextualized
philosophically and aesthetically in the US context and is therefore considered when
necessery in the course of research.)
It is particularly necessary to keep in mind the preeminence of Freud and
psychoanalysis in French thought before 1970: the multiple attempts of
phenomenology (Mahr 1985) and psychiatry philosophically and anthropologically
absorbing Freud as did Lagache, the surrealist artistic program and practice nourished
by open academic discussion of psychoanalysis and psychiatry since the 1920’s,
psychology and psychiatry making Freud a focus in French philosophy after 1945 -
when scholars like Lagache and Foucault taught psychology and philosophy, poetical
or historical epistémologie (Bachelard 1938, Canguilhem 1958) - , the Colloque de
Bonneval in 1960 bringing together philosophers and psychoanalysts (a. (ed.) 1966;
6
Roudinesco 1986, 317-328).
The most important thinker however, Lacan, was not a philosopher by education.
Lacan’s call for a return to the unconscious structured like language, interwoven with
philosophical elements of Husserl (Mahr 1998a), surrealist theory (Mahr 1998a,
1998b), Heidegger, Hegel, French phenomenology (Mahr 1996a, 1998a, 2005a),
Lévy-Straussian anthropology and Jakobson’s linguistics (Roudinesco 1993), resulted
in revealing ontological implications of dream within an extended concept of
narcissist imaginary and the according (partial) object with coining „mirror stage“,
challenging the fundamental rule of psychoanalytic technique and borrowing new
sense to Freudian notions like the ideal ego, deferred action, phallus, pre-oedipal, the
symbolic, overdetermination, transference, displacement and foreclosure (Lacan
1966). Lacan can well be taken as the point of reference to whom all of the seven
author’s work out relationships with almost never referring to him explicitly, the
exception being Irigaray. Therefore the pertinent writings of the authors chosen are to
be examined with attention to what Lacan offered them in the context of their
theories. (Despite his turn to new directions in aesthetic style with for instance
„Encore“, the most noted seminar of Lacan after the Écrits of 1966, and his
mathematical musings in the last decade of his life, Lacan never disputed his credo of
the unconscious being structured as language, of the primacy of the signifier, or the
priority of the symbolic order for the imaginary, a credo that was put into doubts by
all poststructuralists. For this reason, Lacan cannot be considered as a
“poststructuralist” no matter how basic his philosophical challenge remained.)
The most important event in this philosophical history was De l’Interprétation of
Ricoeur, the first philosophical monograph on Freud (Ricoeur 1965, Mahr <2001a>),
including an energeticist reading of the metapsychological chapter of Freud’s
„Interpretation of Dreams“ understanding symbols as psychical productions that
belong to a culture of interpretations in conflicts. The strong reaction to Ricoeur -
strikingly his thorough and ground-breaking treaty is cited by none; after his „defeat“
against Foucault being elected member of the Collège de France in 1970, Ricoeur
seems to have been obliterated from vanguard memory - corresponds with a new
7
wave of philosophical confrontation with Freud and his aesthetics, especially
concerning (Ricoeur’s) archeology, concept of interpretation and triple Marx-
Nietzsche-Freud in Foucault, Derrida, Lyotard, Deleuze (Foucault 1969a, Derrida,
Lyotard, Deleuze 1972a), difference (, compare Mahr 2007a, 320-325), desire
(Deleuze , Lyotard ).
As it happens, French poststructuralist philosophy showed an interest in aesthetics to
a degree that should make us think that this philosophy was intrinsically aesthetic in a
certain sense, something mostly as a reproach so far. Yet the proposal here does not
engage in an investigation in traditional philosophical aesthetics. Aesthetic topics
undergo scrutiny here as far as they come in extent and significance with the
publications to be read referring to Freud who has been inspiring with different parts
of his thought in different ways. The challenge is perceived surprisingly not only
from his applied “aesthetic” writings but also from his „philosophically“ important
ones: Entwurf einer Psychologie 1895 (Kofman 1973), Die Traumdeutung 1900
(Foucault 1984b with critical discourse theory paving the way to an aesthetics of
existence), Der Witz und seine Beziehung zum Unbewussten 1905 (Baudrillard 1976,
Kofman 1985b), Drei Abhandlungen zur Sexualtheorie 1905 (Deleuze 1972 on
alternative accounts of organs for setting up desiring machines, Irigaray 1974 on
sexual difference, Lyotard 1974a on the libidinal dispositif, Kofman 1980 on
women), Das Unheimliche 1919 (Kofman 1975), Jenseits des Lustprinzips 1920
(Lyotard 1975c, Derrida 1980), Notiz über den Wunderblock 1925 (Derrida 1966a,
on the writing apparatus), Die Verneinung 1925 (Kristeva 1974, on the semiotic
process of chora/maternality), Fetischismus 1927 (Baudrillard 1968, Derrida 1978).
(Taking this broad range of texts in account from which the various readings are
realized, it becomes obvious that it is not advised to focus on Freud’s texts written
immediately after Die Traumdeutung, Zur Psychopathologie des Alltagslebens, Der
Witz und seine Beziehung zum Unbewußten and the writings about art that followed
after.)
Kofman. Having studied with psychoanalyst Green for two years and made the
doctorat d’État with Deleuze (1972, 1974a), Kofman’s work oscillated between
8
thinking about Nietzsche and Freud to a great deal. Another point of reference was
Derrida (1984). Not long after her long review article on Jean Bollack’s „Empédocle“
and Freud’s „Die endliche und die unenendliche Analyse“ (1969) Kofman published
her philosophical treatise on Freud’s theory of art (1970). Her philosophical position
is to be found by meas of a close reading of „L'Enfance de l'art“, a book aiming at
recognizing the philosophy of Freud. Accounting for Freud’s attitude to art - no
genius/artist is gifted by nature - as a child to the father, Kofman departs from the
difference between a factual reading of the artwork as a model for unconscious
processes and a symptomal reading of the (text of) the artwork as a patricide, this
difference as one of saying/doing being applied to Freud himself. The symptomal of
the artwork is shown to be a compromise between eros and thanatos that contains the
phantasma and the pathema inseperably. Freud’s theory of art read as symptomal text
and child ambivalent to the father implies an understanding of Freud in the medium
of (philosophical) thought. Soon after, she dealt with the photographic aspects of
Freud’s „Entwurf einer Psychologie“ (1973). With a strong interest in the philosophy
of art and literature as well as in feminist theory she kept exploring Freud’s writings
(1980a, 1985b, 1987, 1991a, 1991b, 1995) with interpreting Freud’s „Der Wahn und
die Träume ...“ (1974), applying the aspect of the double in Freud’s „Das
Unheimliche“ to imitation (1975, 1976), pondering the attraction of narcissist women
to men with comparison to the attraction of children, animals, comic or criminal
persons (1980b), and relating Freud to the philosophy of Plato, Kant, Rousseau and
Diderot (1982, 1985a, 1988). Also, as an extention of her early book on Freud, the
relations of wit to language and women are examined (1980a, 1980b, 1982), and the
role of mixed pleasure in wit (1985b). Her second focus and object of study was
Freud’s „double“ Nietzsche (1972, 1979, 1993). In order to delineate Kofman’s
position, her views on Freud and Nietzsche shall be compared with her own
philosophical position, referring to psychoanalysis as border discipline between
science and philosophy aesthetically relevant (1991a). Freud is Nietzsche’s uncanny
doppelganger.
Lyotard. Probably the only one to transform Merleau-Ponty’s late philosophy into a
9
Freudian aesthetics, Lyotard radicalized it as a philosophy of desire (Waldenfels
1983; Lyotard 1979b), not unlike that of Deleuze (1975a). At a time when Freudo-
Marxism was already in full swing, Lyotard completed a thesis on representation and
figuration according to Freud’s dream mechanism Rücksicht auf Darstellbarkeit
(1971; compare Deleuze 1972b) preceded by the proto-aesthetic manifesto „Dream
work does not think“ where Lyotard had already credited Freud with opposing to the
universality and uniqueness of dreams (1968). In order to include artistic energy, it
was intensities to play the lead, now opposite to discourse and figuration - at that
time, he recoined Foucault’s notion of disposition as dispositif with the Freudian
epitheton „libidinal“ and within a Freudian model of an instinctual „pulsional“
economy (1973a, 1973b, 1973c, 1974a, 1975b) that should become important in
1980es art theory (compare Mahr 1996b, 174f./184f., with an attempt to apply
„Libidodispositiv“). With a theory of the sublime, Lyotard made recourse to Kant and
Burke (1982, 1984, 1986a, 1986b, 1988a, 1988b, 1991a, 1991b, 1991c) but kept
following traces of Freud: Mahr 2003c). The concept of the libidinal
economy/dispositif allows an extended theory of the sublime/sublimation. A step
further is set by Lyotard with his attempt for a Freudian aesthetics of apathic theory
pondering the ambiguous status of theory in science (1975c). This and other 1970es
writings about and with Freud enable a new consideration of Lyotard’s theory of
postmodernity with respect to art and architecture as well as to Freud’s essay on
Schreber and his notion of deferred action (1987/1988, 1979a, 1983; Mahr <2000b>).
The postmodern „structure“ of for example the arts came to effect when Lyotard
exploited his poststructuralist stake with Nachträglichkeit historically and
aesthetically. Lyotard also examined Freud for contributing to film theory (1977a,
1979c) and effectively to a theory of the non-motional visual arts (1977b, 1978,
1981a, 1981b).
Derrida. Continuously thinking about Freud throughout his life, Derrida set out to
use Husserl and Heidegger in the context of his theory of writing that drew
inspiration from the assumptions of surrealist écriture automatique. His is the
endeavour of a philosophy of trace without presupposed subject. Hence, Derrida
10
bases Freud’s mnemonic Bahnungskräfte in the „Entwurf einer Psychologie“ on
posterior elements, as the origin in general is supplementary or hors-texte in Freud
too, an argument used against phonologism. Placed between two essays on Artaud
(1965, 1966b) and Althusserian in its anti-humanist tone and hidden reference to a
theatre without author (Althusser 1993 <1964/65>), the seminal paper of Derrida on
Freud’s „Wunderblock“ (1966a), later extended to the scene of dream (1967), was as
inspiring as to later stimulate the apparatus theory of film and literature (compare
about the visual model of the brain of Freud’s „The Id and the Ego“ in Mahr
<1999b>, Mahr 2006a). The remark on Freud in the systematics of difference further
included a temporisation in the field of an originary economy with Bataille relevant
to Freud (1968c, Mahr 2003b). The surrealist writing of the unconscious shares with
the theater/scene/play of writing an aesthetic and literary philosophy. Seconded with
reflections on the psychoanalytic importance of Lacanian subtext as done in his
interpretations of Artaud, Rousseau, Lévi-Strauss, Kant and Plato, Derrida suggested
a return to mythos with anti-phenomenologically criticizing logos in front of allegory
and phallogocentrism (1965, 1966b, 1967, 1968a, 1968b, 1969, 1974a, 1975, 1976,
1978, for a criticism of 1978 see Mahr 1993). He dealt with Lacan (1971), finally
attacking him (1980a). Against Lacan, the return to myth supports an aesthetics
parallel to para-philosophical discipline of „grammatology“. At the same time he
intensified his occupation with Freud from the late 1970ies (1979a, 1980a, 1983)
culminating in a volume inspired by Levinas’s concept of the other (1987a, 1987b).
With re-reading Lacan, Foucault and Lyotard (1990a, 1991, 1992a, 1992b, 2001a)
and criticizing some psychoanalytic institutions, for instance archives (1981, 1995),
Derrida continued to take particular points of departure for work on more general
philosophical topics (1996, 2000, 2001b, 2002; 2001; Roudinesco 1986). (An account
of Derrida’s several approaches to Freud ought to constantly keep in the corner of the
eye - by way of a hermeneutics of suspicion - that Derrida’s reflections about theatre,
music, literature, architecture and art are (or may be) inspired by his occupation with
Freud (1965, 1966a, 1966b; 1967, 1979b; 1972, 1974b, 1980b, 2000; 1985b, 1986a,
1986b, Mahr <1999d>; 1978, 1985a, 1990b, 1990c).)
11
Irigaray. Philosopher, psychologist, psychopathologist and linguist by education as
well as trained in psychoanalysis, Irigaray became known with analyzing the
language of mental illnes, especially demence (1973). In the first third of her opus
magnum (1974) she subjected Freud to heavy criticism (see also 1977c) under the
premises of a feminist theory of sexual difference. Transgressing Beauvoir’s
egalitarian feminism, Irigaray’s work represented the focus for liberation of writing
as an act subverting male, phallocentric language. With respect to sexuation as an act
before sublimation, Irigaray aimed at returning of the suppressed. Rejecting
interconnected gazes, poses and genitalia in Freud’s sexual theory with upholding a
feminine imaginary, enabled Irigaray to gain insight into an unknown, feminine
desire and an acting-out of masquerades of femininity. Also, for a long time women
were destined to mimicry; now they play with mimesis revealing women’s place
elsewhere (1975). Masquerade as sexuality inscribed is seen as theatrical practice.
Non-located pleasure came to the fore, a pleasure of a being-always-more-than-one
(1977a; compare Mahr 2003a, chapter „Sex“, 75-98, 92f. and 89-91, 94, with regards
to Irigaray’s influence on conceiving sex as theatrical practice in Butler 1990). She
further developed and applied her position in various essays (1977a, 1977b, 1979,
1981, 1984, 1992). As she had done with Plato on the background of Freud (1974),
another critique emerged from a more detailed reading of Heidegger (1982). Like
Kofman, Irigaray needs to be studied in her interpretations of philosophical texts like
that of Nietzsche and Freud (1989) and in writings concerning the feminine in art
(1988, 1994). With regards to sexual difference, sublimation is considered neither
genital nor female altogether like Freud, says Irigaray, who did not acknowledge
genitally determined drives in women accordingly related to the minor arts and only
exceptionally to poetry, painting and music - a recognition that allows for conceiving
„non-sublimation“ in women’s activity directed toward the Other (1984; compare
2003, 2004). With criticizing Freud, Irigaray’s concept of sexual difference entails a
new aesthetics of sexuation understood as an act before sublimation.
Kristeva. From the outset, Kristeva has been examining the theoretical uses of
psychoanalysis. Educated in linguistics and literary studies and later trained as
12
psychoanalyst she conceived of a sémanalyse to merge the tasks of psychoanalysis
and semiology/semiotics (1969), an endeavour further involving philosophical
reflection (1974; Schmitz 2000). What Kristeva made term as revolutionary, semiotic
primary process of poetic language - differing from Lacan’s symbolic - was at the
same time resuming Lacan’s discourse of the real, now taken as an appearance of a
drive: the vehicle for explaining phenomena like the appearance of the surrounding
maternal bodily chora, with reference to Plato (1974, 1979; compare Derrida 1987c).
In order to „dynamize“ signs, Kristeva threw the subject back into sensual dynamics
(1973, again 1977a, 1976, 1977b), only to play the card as a form of revolt (1974;
compare <1999b> (= Mahr <1999c>) on the imaginary complicit with a revolution of
the unconscious decentering the conscious subject of exterior experience as in the
borderline states of psycho-social pathologies in modern literature; reversely,
Kristeva shed increasingly light on the literary potential of psychoanalysis itself
(1990, 1992, 1993a, 1993b, 1998b, 2002, 2003). The program of sémanalyse is a
psychoanalytic philosophy of language expanded by a bodily based aesthetics of
poetic revolt. With interpreting for instance art and literature, psychoanalysis stayed
on the agenda with the topics disgust - the abject, an offspring of Aufhebung as
(non)sublimation/Verwerfung (1974) - , the city, love, identification (1980, 1983,
1984a, 1984b). Particular attention deserve Kristeva’s later publications, for instance
her apprehensions of Barthes’s occasional comments on psychoanalysis (1996, 1997)
or the philosophical work of Arendt and Klein. It is claimed that Kristeva reactualized
the philosophical momentum in Freud now based on the aesthetic of
linguistic differenciation in bodily based interaction (1999a, 2000). Also, a concept of
phantasy is reformulated preserving the uproaring potential contrary to Freud’s notion
of phantasizing as sublimatory (1998b). Phantasy can be read as a revolt against
sublimation. More recently Kristeva reconsidered feminist aspects of her position
concerning the phenomenon of the holy (1998a) and on philosopher Hannah Arendt
as well as psychoanalyst Melanie Klein confronting the Kantian fragile faculty of
taste as a pleasure on duty with the Freudian concept of suppression (1999a, 2000).
Foucault. At a time when Freud was still to be found among psychologists,
13
philosopher and psychologist by education Foucault was concerned with transcending
psychology by means of Binswanger’s Daseinsanalyse (1954a, 1954b, 1957a, 1957b,
1965). A bit later, the analysis of dreams was considered to reveal Husserl’s theory of
meaning as subjective and Freud’s symptomatology as objective with leading a
psychoanalysis of images to an ontological analysis of imagination (1957b). With
attacking psychiatry and the psychoanalytic conceptions of melancholiy and hysteria,
and with demanding psychosis and schizophrenia be left un-diagnosed Foucault
focused on the role of madness as a mental and epistemic phenomenon (1961, 1962a,
1962b, 1964a; for an application of the last chapter of the English translation of 1961
to modern art see Mahr <1999a>). Yet Foucault continued to revolve around the
unconscious and its traces in the literary interpretations of Rousseau (1962c),
Flaubert (1966c), Bataille (1963), Blanchot (1966b), or Klossowski (1964b) in order
to reclaim Freud as liberating language as such from madness as French literature had
done since Mallarmé (1964a). Although Foucault accords to Freud a modest place in
his monumental historical epistemology of modern times, the last spurs of modern
epistémé in Lacanian psychoanalysis and Lévi-Straussian anthropology are
characterized within an unfolding of the unconscious the modern sciences exhausting
the epistemic and literary subject (1966, Mahr <1999a>). The unfolding of the
unconscious and its traces of literature of Rousseau, Flaubert, Bataille, Blanchot, or
Klossowski yield a structural function of Freud for dissolving representation in
modern arts and episteme. This paves the way for rephrasing Ricoeur’s skepticist trio
Marx/Nietzsche/Freud with interpretation not anymore giving way to the being of
language (1964a), but as integral part of discourse to be observed, the effect being
sexuality not seen as nourishing language but being regulated by the powers of
discourse (1967, 1976a). Yet, a renewed hermeneutic concept of interpretation will
serve as part of a concept of care when, besides and against Freud and his theory of
dreams, Foucault, with his hermeneutic/technology of the self (1988), prepares for an
aesthetics of existence with Freudian ingredients (1981, 1984a, 1984b, 1984c). An
occupation with Freud and the method of interpretation lays the basis for an
aesthetics of existence on the basis of a hermeneutics of the self. Before arriving at
14
this conclusion, Freud will have served Foucault as demonstration point for a critical
discourse theory of the constraint to speak the truth, of the relation of sex and power,
of Freud’s discourse founding an „authorship“ inextricably linked to autoanalysis
(1969a, 1973, 1976a, 1977a) and for explicit criticism on Freud siding with Deleuze
in his lecture on king Oedipus (1994) as already in remarks concerning Freud’s text
on Teufelsneurose (1969b) and in a discussion circle of psychoanalysts (1977b). The
para-philosophical disciplines „archeology“ and „genealogy“ carry paraesthetical
dimensions as demonstrated by Freud.
Deleuze. The number of Freud occurences in Deleuze’s earlier non-monograph
writings is only matched by Kant, Foucault and Nietzsche (2002). Although he
referred to Freud in his book about Nietzsche only three times, there is a similarity
between Nietzsche and Freud as Deleuze himself indicates (1962). As Deleuze‘s
reading of Nietzsche relates to the period’s intensive occupation with Freud in and
besides philosophy around 1960 (Roudinesco 1986, see also Gasser 1997) and
Nietzsche is crucial for Deleuze’s concepts of repetition and differential, the
hypothesis is as follows: The double and counterpoint of Nietzsche to Freud may be
conceived as a poetic figure. A first explicit difference with Freud is shown in the
theory of masochism with respect to the significance of a heterogeneous world
without symbolization as shown in the literature of Sacher-Masoch (1967a, 1967b). A
more complex picture of Freud with further criticism is shown in the major books of
the period (1968, 1969) and a remark on the differential unconscious in Deleuze’s
account of structuralism (1973b). According to it, the order of the symbolic by way of
the elements’ positions depends on the differentiality prior to the structure and sense
of all effects. Therefore, a concept of a differential unconscious cannot be maintained.
Then, together with psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Félix Guattari. The return of the
repressed body and affect gives way to an anti-oedipal aesthetic of desiring
machines. At stake was a promotion of the return of what was repressed by Lacan as
well as Freud in part, a return of the Freud of affects, a Reichian antipsychiatrist
synthesis with holding polymorphous-libidinal madness and schizophrenia against
familial Oedipian psychoanalytic conformism with the concept of desiring machines
15
(1972a, 1970a, 1973a). What does the conception of a radical philosophy of desiring
machines consist of (1970b, 1973b)? Which is the Anti-Oedipus Freud share of
Guattari who thought psychoanalysis miserable (Roudinesco 1986)? A second
volume of „Capitalism and Schizophrenia“ was called „Mille Plateaux“ instead of
„Schizoanalysis“ because of the dawn of Freudianism to be observed in the late
1970ies (1980; 1970b, see also 1975c, 1975b, 1975a; Roudinesco 1986) although
there are frequent occurences of Freud (Mahr <2006b>). Also, a more clarified stance
on Freud is given at that time, for instance about Freud's analysis of the Wolf Man
(1977a, 1977b, 1975a). As the essay on Sacher-Masoch (1967a) is about a novelist
like the books about Carroll, Proust and Kafka (1969, 1970, 1975d) the questions
arise to which extent Deleuze’s readings of literature contain ingredients resulting in
a theory of literature and how this theory resists or adapts to psychoanalytic
interpretation. Deleuze wrote his later monographs in part on the visual arts clarifying
his position on Freud (1981, 1983, 1985) this time influenced by Foucault’s aesthetics
of existence (1986, 1991).
Freud’s theory is important for poststructuralist philosophy as far as it is heteroclite,
diagnostic, therapeutic and transgressive. If not a post-structuralist himself, he
certainly prepared for decentering the conscious ego and subverting/deducing it from
familial, cultural, social and historical context and practice, drawing the
consequential elements for a construction of identities in difference (gender, class,
belief), ascertaining already a seeminglessly endless interpretation of aesthetic signs
as effect of symbolic structures and considering it as illusionary. If undermined by
aesthetic anaesthesia, disgust or bodily subversion in language today, a philosophical
theory of the aesthetic in terms of aesthetic qualities/aisthesis and of the arts
producing aesthetic like Freud’s psychological one helped to prepare assumptions
that
there might be no unity of the aesthetic in Freud taken as a consequence with Freud’s
theory. Moreover there is an anti-aesthetic actualized and radicalized with the notions
of the sublime (Lyotard), of disgust (Derrida, Kristeva), the terrific (Lyotard), the
uncanny (Kofman), the phantastic (Kristeva). According to more recent
16
extravaganzas of the ideology of the aesthetic (Mahr 2003a), this may be read as an
anti-aesthetizisation, a desublimation in discontents with culture, a desublimation of
our environment and an aesthetizisation of philosophy.
there might be no work of art with Freud, no theory of art because of the nature of
writing (Derrida), the aesthetic machines instead (Deleuze), a pathological absence of
work (Foucault), painting only as libidinal dispositif (Lyotard), a childhood of art
instead of adult production (Kofman), a child as work of art (Irigaray), figuration
without representation (Lyotard). What Freud holds - that the artist/genius makes the
best of his/her neuroses, and play and phantasizing may but need not result in a work
of art - makes the poststructuralists dispense with art as a primary object of reflection
and shift attention to the fragile semiotic expressions.
there might be no stable aesthetic experience with Freud because sublimation is
undermined by a permanent sources of discontents, difference of roles and fluent
entitites. Moreover, aesthetic experience dissolves into a field of forces of intensities
(Lyotard), sexual difference by masquerade (Irigaray), the sensual dynamics of chora
(Kristeva), an aesthetics of existence to be constantly weighed out (Foucault), the
finitude of desiring machines (Deleuze).
Now, assembling all the hypotheses relating to the seven authors above, they may be
grouped with respect to the tackling of the aesthetics of sublimation, of the
unconscious, the self and of Freud’s theory as applied to history, the history of
philosophy, and philosophy.
Firstly, the unconscious is not so much structured as language but as more dynamical
bodily activity and writing. A revolution of the body is contained in two programs.
The return of the repressed body and affect gives way to an anti-oedipal aesthetic of
desiring machines (Deleuze). The program of sémanalyse is a psychoanalytic
philosophy of language expanded by a bodily based aesthetics of poetic revolt
(Kristeva). The scene of writing may be identified as another point agaist stark
linguistic structure. The surrealist writing of the unconscious shares with the
theater/scene/play of writing an aesthetic and literary philosophy (Derrida).
Masquerade as sexuality inscribed is seen as theatrical practice (Irigaray).
17
Secondly, sublimation has become a hotly disputed topic: The concept of the libidinal
economy/dispositif allows an extended theory of the sublime/sublimation (Lyotard).
Phantasy can be read as a revolt against sublimation (Kristeva). With criticizing
Freud, Irigaray’s concept of sexual difference entails a new aesthetics of sexuation
understood as an act before sublimation (Irigaray).
Thirdly, an aesthetics of the self is delineated by a conflictual care of the self
transgressing the mode of art work. An occupation with Freud and the method of
interpretation sets the base for an aesthetics of existence on the basis of a
hermeneutics of the self (Foucault). Freud’s theory of art read as symptomal text and
child ambivalent to the father implies an understanding of Freud in the medium of
(philosophical) thought (Kofman).
Additionally, a series of applications - the reach of psychoanalysis into history, the
history of philosophy, and philosophy - needs to be examined for gaining the
contribution value to aesthetics. The first couple of hypotheses concern the history of
the “modern”. The unfolding of the unconscious and its traces of literature of
Rousseau, Flaubert, Bataille, Blanchot, or Klossowski yield a structural function of
Freud for dissolving representation in modern arts and episteme (Foucault). The
postmodern „structure“ of for example the arts came to effect when Lyotard exploited
his poststructuralist stake with „Nachträglichkeit“ historically and aesthetically
(Lyotard). The second couple of claims concerns the proximity of a Freud
contemporary. For Kofman, Freud is Nietzsche’s uncanny doppelganger (Kofman).
The double and counterpoint of Nietzsche to Freud may be conceived as a poetic
figure (Deleuze). Ant the third two theses question at least indirectly the
philosophical status of aesthetics itself. Against Lacan, the return to myth supports an
aesthetics parallel to para-philosophical discipline of „grammatology“(Derrida). The
para-philosophical disciplines „archeology“ and „genealogy“ carry paraesthetical
dimensions as demonstrated by Freud (Foucault).
More pervasively, the hypothesis may be formulated that Derrida, Foucault and
Deleuze, as referred to by Kofman 1970, Kofman herself and philosophers of the
period like Lyotard, Irigaray and Kristeva contribute to poststructuralism by way of
18
their approaches to the oeuvre of Freud: decentered structures in the process of
(un)making and dependent from social and cultural context, critique of and return to
the subject applied to history/power/desire as effect of identity in difference, fugitive
sense of works of art as an effect of structures with awareness of its illusionary
character.
(In contrast to this more connective hypothetical account, there must not be forgotten
- for the sake of further differenciation - that there are significant distinctions between
the authors under examination. Two directions of research need to be gone here. As a
prerequisiote, a painstaking characterization of the several individual philosophical
positions - and positions in philosophical aesthetics - is to be rendered in order to
recognize why which writings of Freud were chosen. And a determination of the
respective treating of the Freud passages/writings and topics by comparable readings
will unearth the final differences of the poststructuralist authors to be read.)
1.3 importance of expected results for the discipline
The expected results should give further evidence for including the thought of
Sigmund Freud into philosophy, a more critical discussion of systematic
philosophical aesthetics, a deeper understanding of the philosophy covered by the
term poststructuralism.
Another more particular goal is to foster the discussion with the philosophy of
psychoanalysis in the analytic tradition (Giampieri-Deutsch (ed.) 2004).
The most important aim however is to give to the discipline aesthetics fresh impulses
in order to give back to aesthetics the role it deserves, but seems to have lost since the
1980es.
1.4 methods
In order to achieve the research goal in three years, a strict reading methodology
needs to be observed. The steps include -
concerning Freud
- to collect the passages of texts of the French philosophers pertinent to (which?)
Freud’s writings, in case of long Freud portions (for example Deleuze 1972a, Derrida
1980a) with particular attention to aesthetic matters in them
19
- to take notice, in passing, of references to the psychoanalysis of Lacan, Klein and
other psychanalytic authors referred to explicitly or implicitly
- to re-read Freud for a better understanding of the passages found
- to re-collect all the French passages found in order to coordinate them to the
singular texts of Freud and within the context of his work (compare double reading
method in Mahr 2004a)
concerning French poststructuralism
- to determine the various uses of Freud texts by the French authors’ in the context of
their own respective work/texts
- to situate Freud in the writings screened and assess the role Freud’s writings play
- to evaluate the findings with respect to the (non-)proximity to the author’s core
thought (passages and chapters)
- to compare the various uses by the French authors’ and assess their importance
- to give preliminary accounts of the French authors’ interpretations of Freud and
address the differences between their interpretive perspectives (method Mahr 2004a)
with respect to central topics like autoanalysis, sexuality, sublimation, Freudo-
Marxism, the unconscious, symbolization, women, melancholy, technique, psychic
apparatus (compare the Taureck (ed.) 1988 sections on subject, metaphysics,
sexuality, violence)
concerning aesthetics
- to refocus the passages found according to the aesthetic topics immediately found in
the French authors or according to the aesthetic position of the authors
- to address the aesthetics of the French theoreticians in order to establish a
philosophical framework of what is the their philosophical aesthetics
- to pay particular attention to Freud mentionings in longer aesthetics portions
finally
- to assess lacks in poststructuralism and in consequence criticize misapprehensions
or highlight valuables in Freud
- to develop an awareness for a possible history of reception similar to that of
Nietzsche (Le Rider 1997, an example of a short and concise account full of verve)
20
- to indirectly bring relief, expansion and suggestions for the German Lacan reception
reading Ricoeur, Laplanche and Pontalis, but nobody of the poststructuralists
(compare hypocritical Gadamer 2000).
2 aspects implied for scientific community and beyond
Results and effects to be expected will be important for further research in
psychoanalysis and other humanities involved with French philosophy, particularly in
Vienna where a significant part of research in French philosophy is done today (Arno
Böhler, Ulrike Kadi, Peter Kampits, Yvanka Raynova, Susanne Moser, Sylvia Stoller,
Gerhard Unterthurner, Erik Vogt, Eva Waniek; see also for Vienna continental
philosophy in general http://foo.phl.univie.ac.at/fb01/ Also, the discussion with the
philosophy of psychoanalysis in the tradition of analytic philosophy shall further be
enhanced (Giampieri-Deutsch (ed.) 2004). Being aware of this aspect, impulses for
research in German philosophy and continental philosophy abroad may
be expected.
Impulses and effects for other fields of research and beyond the scientific community
are to be expected with an additional translation of activities described in last
paragraph.

3 list of literature relevant to project

Included are short titles of monographs (year of publication in bold face) and of
articles (with the sources providing full titles of main authors to be examined, and
their respective indications of secondary literature to be read).
A. (ed.) 1966VIe Colloque de Bonneval: L’Inconscient - ADORNO 1951Freudian
Theory and the Pattern of Fascist Propaganda - ALTHUSSER 1993Écrits sur la
psychanalyse. Freud et Lacan. Textes réunis - ASSOUN 1976Freud, la philosophie et
les philosophes - 1981Introduction à l’épistémologie freudienne -1993Introduction à
la métapsychologie freudienne - BACHELARD 1938La psychanalyse du feu -
BARTHES 1965Michelet par lui-même - 1973Le plaisir du texte - 1975Roland
Barthes par Roland Barthes - BAUDRILLARD 1968Le Système des objets - 1973Le
21
21
Miroir de la production - 1976aL’Echange symbolique et la mort - BELSEY
2002Poststructuralism, a very short introduction - BERSANI 1986The Freudian
Body: Psychoanalysis and Art - BINSWANGER 1942 Grundformen und Erkenntnis
menschlichen Daseins - BLOOM 1975Kabbalah and Criticism - BOSS
1957Psychoanalyse und Daseinsanalytik - BÜHLER 1927Die Krise der Psychologie
- BURGIN 1986The End of Art Theory. Criticism and Postmodernity - BUTLER
1990Gender Trouble - CANGUILHEM 1958Qu’est-ce que la psychologie? -
CARROLL 1987Paraesthetics. Foucault. Lyotard. Derrida - CAVELL 1993The
Psychopanalytic Mind: From Freud to Philosophy - CIXOUS 1972La fiction et ses
phantômes. Une lecture de l’Unheimliche - 1976aLe Rire de la Méduse - 1976bLa
missexualité, où jouis-je? - 2003Rêve, je te dis - CLÉMENT 1975Miroirs du sujet -
1978aBildoungue, une vie de Freud? - 1978bLes fils de Freud sont fatigués -
DELEUZE 1962Nietzsche et la philosophie 1967aPrésentation de Sacher-Masoch -
1967b - 1968Différence et répétition - 1969Logique du sens - 1970aSchizologie -
1970bProust et les signes - 1972a(+Guattari)Capitalisme et schizophrénie -
1972bAppréciation <on Lyotard's Discours, figure - 1973a(+Guattari)
Bilanprogramme pour machines désirantes - 1973À Quoi reconnait-on le
structuralisme? - 1975a(+Guattari)<on Freud's Wolf Man> - 1975bSchizophrénie et
société - 1975c(+Lyotard)A propos du departement de psychanalyse -
1975d(+Guattari)Kafka. Pour une litterature mineure - 1976(+Guattari)Rhizome:
Introduction - 1977a(+Parnet)Dialogues - 1977b(+Guattari)Politique et psychanalyse
- 1978Presentation on: "Freud et la psychanalyse" - 1980(+Guattari)Capitalisme et
schizophrenie 2 - 1981Francis Bacon - 1983Cinema-1 - 1985Cinéma-2 - 1986aSur le
régime cristallin - 1986bLa vie comme une oeuvre d'art - 1991(+Guattari)Qu'est-ce
que la philosophie? - 2002L’Île déserte (Didier Gazagnadou, Deleuze / Bibliographie
et mondes inédits, http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/texte.php?
cle=187&groupe=Bibliographie%20et%20mondes%20in%E9dits&langue=2 dl Jan
2, 2007) - DERRIDA 1965La Parole soufflé - 1966aFreud et la scène de l’écriture -
1966bLa théatre de la cruauté ou la clôture de la représentation - 1967De la
grammatologie - 1968aLa pharmacie de Platon <I> - 1968bLa pharmacie de Platon
22
<II> - 1968cLa différance - 1969Nature, culture, écriture - 1971Entretien avec
Houdebine et Scarpetta - 1972La Dissémination - 1974aGlas - 1974bMallarmé -
1978La Vérité en peinture 1979aMe - Psychoanalysis (Introduction to Abraham’s Le
Verbier de l’homme aux loups) - 1979bCe qui reste à force de musique - 1980aLa
Carte postale: De Socrate à Freud - 1980bThe Law of Genre - 1981Géopsychanalyse
- 1983La chance - 1985aDroit de regards: photographie - 1985bBernard Tschumi. La
Case vide: La Villette - 1986aArchitecture et philosophie - 1986bPoint de Folie -
Maintenant l'architecture - 1987aPsyché: Inventions de l'autre - 1987bEntretien avec
Jacques Derrida – 1987cChora – 1990aLet us not Forget - Psychoanalysis -
1990bMémoires d'aveugle. L'autoportrait et autres ruines 1990cVideor - 1991Pour
l’amour de Lacan - 1992aRésistances - 1992bEtre juste avec Freud: L'histoire de la
folie - 1995Mal d’archive. Une impression freudienne - 1996As if I were dead -
2000Word Processing - 2001a(+Roudinesco) De quoi demain - 2001bLyotard et nous
- 2002Psychoanalytic Searches (Peter Krapp, Jacques Derrida - Bibliography of
Works, http://www.hydra.umn.edu/derrida/jdyr.html accessed Aug 10, 2007 and Peter
Zeillinger, Jacques Derrida. Bibliographie der französichen, deutschen und
englischen Werke, Wien: Turia + Kant 2005) - DUFRENNE 1953Phénoménologie
de l'expérience esthétique - EAGLETON 1990The Ideology of the Aesthetic -
FOUCAULT 1954aMaladie mentale et personnalité - 1954bIntroduction - 1957aLa
recherche scientifique et la psychologie - 1957bLa psychologie de 1850 à 1950 -
1961Histoire de la folie - 1962aMaladie mentale et psychologie - 1962bLe ‘non’ du
père - 1962cIntroduction aux Dialogues de Rousseau - 1963Préface à la transgression
- 1964aLa folie, l’absence d’oeuvre - 1964bLa prose d’Actéon - 1965Philosophie et
psychologie - 1966aLes mots et les choses - La pensée du dehors - 1966cUn
„fantastique“ de bibliothèque - 1967Nietzsche, Freud, Marx - 1969aQu’est-ce qu’un
auteur? - 1969bMédecins, juges et sorciers au XVIIe siècle - 1973Em torno de Édipo
- 1976aHistoire de la sexualité 1 - 1976bL'Occident et la vérité du sexe -
1977aPreface Anti-Oedipus - 1977bLe jeu de Michel Foucault, in Ornicar? -
1981Sexuality and Solitude - 1984aHistoire de la sexualité 2 - 1984bHistoire de la
sexualité 3 - 1984cL’éthique de souci de soi comme pratique de liberté -
23
23
1988Technologies of the self - 1994La vérité et les formes juridiques (Michael
Buchmann, Bibliografie der Texte Michel Foucaults,
http://www.poststrukturalismus.ag.vu/originalausgaben.html accessed Aug 10, 2007
and James W. Bernauer, The Works of Michel Foucault 1954-1984, in: Michel
Foucault’s Force of Flight, New Jersey/London-E: 1990, 231-254) - FRANK
1984Was ist Neostrukturalismus? - FROMM 1931Die Entwicklung des
Christusdogmas. Eine psychoanalytische Studie zur sozialpsychologischen Funktion
der Religion - GARDNER 1996Aesthetics - GASSER 1997Nietzsche und Freud -
GADAMER 2000 Geleitwort >Lang, Strukturale Psychoanalyse> - GENETTE
1997L’OEuvre d’art. II. La relation esthétique - GIAMPIERI-DEUTSCH (ed.)
2004Psychoanalyse im Dialog der Wissenschaften. Bd. 2: Anglo-Amerikanische
Perspektiven - GÖDDE 1999Traditionslinien des Unbewußten. Schopenhauer,
Nietzsche, Freud - HARTMAN (ed.) 1978Psychopanalysis and the Question of Text
- HAUSER 1958Philosophie der Kunstgeschichte – HEMECKER 1991Vor Freud.
Philosophiegeschichtliche Voraussetzungen der Psychoanalyse - IRIGARAY 1973Le
Langage des déments - 1974Speculum de l'autre femme - 1975Pouvoir du
discours/Subordination du féminin - 1977aCe sexe qui n'en est pas un - 1977bRetour
à la théorie psychanalytique - 1977cCet autre, la femme - 1979Et l'une ne bouge pas
sans l'autre - 1981Le Corps-à-corps avec la mère - 1982L'Oubli de l'air chez Martin
Heidegger - 1984Éthique de la différence sexuelle - 1988Die Kunst von Frauen -
1989Nietzsche, Freud et les femmes - 1992J'aime à toi: esquisse d'une félicité dans
l'histoire - 1994Le jardin clos de l'âme: l'imaginaire des religieuses - 2003A Future
Horizon for Art? - 2003To Paint the Invisible – JIMENEZ 1997Qu’est-ce que
l’esthétique? - KOFMAN 1969Freud et Empédocle - 1970L'Enfance de l'art: une
interprétation de l'esthétique freudienne - 1972Nietzsche et la métaphore - 1973Freud
- l’appareil photographique - 1974Quatre romans analytiques - 1975Vautour rouge
(Le double dans les Élixirs du diable d’Hoffmann) - 1976<on mimesis> -
1979Nietzsche et la scène philosophique - 1980aL'Énigme de la femme: la femme
dans les textes de Freud - 1980bLa femme narcissique: Freud et Girard - 1982Le
24
Respect des femmes: Kant et Rousseau - 1983Un Métier impossible - 1984Lectures
de Derrida - 1985aLa Mélancolie de l'art - 1985bPourquoi rit-on? Freud et le mot
d'esprit - 1987Conversions: "Le Marchand de Venise" sous le signe de Saturne -
1988Mirror and Oneiric Images. Plato, Precursor of Freud - 1991a"Il n'y a que le
premier pas qui coûte": Freud et la spéculation - 1991b(+Masson)Don Juan
ou le Refus de la dette - 1993Explosion. II, Les enfants de Nietzsche -
1995L'imposture de la beauté: et autres texts (Duncan Large, Sarah Kofman:
Bibliography, 1963-1998, in: Penelope Deutscher/Kelly Oliver (Hg.), Enigmas.
Essays on Sarah Kofman, Ithaca-NY/London-E: Cornell University Press 1999, 264-
275) - KRISTEVA 1969Sèméiotiké: recherches pour une sémanalyse - 1973Le Sujet
en procès - 1974bLa Révolution du langage poétique: l'avant-garde à la fin du XIXe
siècle - 1976Contraintes rythmiques et langage poétique - 1977aPolylogue - 1977bLa
Musique parlée - 1979Il n’y a pas de maître à langage - 1980Pouvoirs de l'horreur.
Essai sur l'abjection 1983Psychoanalysis and the polis - 1984aHistoires d'amour -
1984bDe l'identification: Freud, Baudelaire, Stendhal - 1987aSoleil noir. Dépression
et mélancolie 1987bLa Vierge de Freud - 1988Étrangers à nous-mêmes - 1990A quoi
bon des psychanalystes en temps de détresse qui s'ignore - 1992Hystérie, les signes et
le roman - 1993aPsychanalyse et linguistique - 1993bLa psychanalyse c'est du roman
- 1994The Semiotic and the symbolic - 1996Sens et non-sens de la révolte - 1997La
Révolte intime - 1998a(+Clément)Le féminin et le sacré - 1998bPsychoanalysis and
the Imaginary - 1999aLe Génie féminin: la vie, la folie, les mots: Hannah Arendt -
1999bDas literarische Denken denken (= Mahr <1999c>) - 2000Le Génie féminin:
Mélanie Klein - 2001Artaud entre psychose et révolte - 2002Psychanalyse et liberté -
2003Pelléas et Mélisande: Ein tönende Melancholie (Hélène Volat, Julia Kristeva: A
Bibliography, http://ms.cc.sunysb.edu/%7Ehvolat/kristeva/kristeva.htm accessed Aug
10, 2007) - KUHNS 1983 Psychoanalytic Theory of Art: A Philosophy of Art on
Developmental Principles - LACAN 1966Écrits - LISTOWELL 1933Modern
Aesthetics. An Historical Introduction - LYOTARD 1968Le Travail du rêve ne pense
pas - 1971Discours, figure - 1972Psychanalyse et peinture - 1973aDes Dispositifs
pulsionnels - 1973bDèrive à partir de Marx et Freud - 1973cLa Peinture comme
25
dispositif libidinal - 1974aÉconomie libidinale - 1975a(+Deleuze)A propos du
departement de psychanalyse - 1975bIn cui si considerano certe pareti … -
1975cApathie théorique - 1977aThe Unconscious as Mise-en-Scène - 1977bLes
Transformateurs Duchamp - 1977cRudiments païens, genre dissertatif -
1977dInstructions païennes - 1978Notes prèliminaires sur le pragmatique des oeuvres
- 1979aLa Condition postmoderne - 1979bThe Psychoanalytic Approach - 1979cThat
Part of Cinema Called Television - 1981aTheory as Art - 1981bLa Philosophie et la
peinture à l'ère de leur expérimentation - 1982Réponse à la question: qu'est-ce que le
postmoderne? - 1983Le Différend - 1984The Sublime and the Avant-Garde -
1986aGrundlagenkrise - 1986bL'Enthousiasme: la critique kantienne de l'histoire -
1987/1988Vertiginous Sexuality: Schreber's Commerce with God - 1988aLes
Lumières, le sublime 1988bL'Intérêt du sublime - 1991aLa Réflexion dans
l'Esthétique kantienne - 1991bLectures d'enfance - 1991cLeçons sur l'Analytique du
sublime: Kant - (European Graduate School EGS, Jean-François Lyotard,
Bibliography, http://www.egs.edu/faculty/jeanfrancoislyotard.html accessed Jan 2,
2007 and R. Clausjürgens, Bibliographie zum Gesamtwerk, in: Lyotard 1983 dt., 309-
323) - MACINTYRE 1958 - The unconscious. A conceptual analysis - MAHR
<1985>Hegels Kritik der Wissenschaft in seinem System von 1807 <Wien: PhD
Dissertation, 154 pages> - 1993Aus dem Rahmen gefallen. Philosophische
Spurensicherung <Derrida 1978, dt. >, in: Parnass, September/Oktober, 104f. - 1996a
Marketing wissenschaftlicher Weltauffassung, in: Peter Mahr (Hg.) Erinnerung an
Moritz Schlick. Textbeiträge und Ausstellungskatalog anläßlich des 60. Todestages, =
Biblos-Schriften 165, Wien: Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 1996, 78-84. -
1996bDer Falco-Effekt. Zur Theorie österreichischer Kunst von 1977 bis 1988, in:
Patrick Werkner (Hg.), Kunst in Österreich 1945-1995. Ein Symposion der
Hochschule für angewandte Kunst in Wien im April 1995, Wien: WUV-Verlag, 165-
185 - 1998aStil, Dalí und Spiegelstadium. Zum Surrealismus Jacques Lacans, in:
Karl Stockreiter (Hg.), Schöner Wahnsinn. Beiträge zu Psychoanalyse und Kunst,
Wien: Turia & Kant 1998, 174-197 - 1998bÜbersetzung. 14. Jacques Lacan, hiatus
irrationalis (1929). Übersetzung in: 1998a, 174 - 1998c Graz, Wien, Prag - zur
26
universitären Ästhetik der Donaumonarchie von 1880-1914. Vorlesungsverzeichnisse,
Kurzbiographien, Interpretation, in: Benedikt/Knoll (Hg.), Verdrängter Humanismus -
Verzögerte Aufklärung, Bd.4: Philosophie in Österreich (1880-1920), Klausen-
Leopoldsdorf/Klausenburg (RU): Leben-Kunst-Wissenschaft/Editura Triade 1998,
793-816.- <1999a>How Foucault Could Have Approached Modern Art: Archaeology
Expanded. Korrigierte Fassung eines Referats für die Sektion "Foucault, Bourdieu,
Practice" von "Passions, Persons, Powers", 7. Jahreskonferenz der International
Association for Philosophy and Literature an der University of California at Berkeley
1992, am 2. Mai 1992, in: mvä 2 (1999) Nr.1/März, 14528 Zeichen. /991f4-01.html -
<1999b>Wir probieren eine Existenz aus. David Cronenbergs Film eXistenZ (1999),
in: mvä 2 (1999) Nr.2/Juni, 27289 Zeichen. /992f4-03.html - <1999c>(trsl.)Julia
Kristeva, Das literarische Denken denken (Penser la pensée littéraire). Vortrag vom
28. Mai 1999 beim Kolloquium "Où en est la théorie littéraire?", Université Paris 7
Denis Diderot am 28. und 29. Mai 1999, in: mvä 2 (1999), Nr.4/Dezember, 48247
Zeichen. /994f4-11.html – <1999d>Hausmusik. In: mvä 2 (1999) Nr.4/Dezember,
13466 Zeichen. /994f4-03.html - <2000a>(Rev.)Günther Pöltner (Hg.),
Phänomenologie der Kunst. Wiener Tagungen zur Phänomenologie 1999, = Reihe der
Österreichischen Gesellschaft für Phänomenologie, Bd. 5, Frankfurt am
Main/Berlin/Bern: Peter Lang 2000, 229 S., in: mvä 3 (2000) Nr.4/Dezember, 30699
Zeichen. /004f4-10.html - <2000b>Hollein mit Lyotard. Annäherung an die
Erzählung der Architektur. in: mvä 3 (2000) Nr.3/September, 36797 Zeichen. 003f4-
03.html - <2001a>"Die Traumdeutung" als Kunstphilosophie (Kuhns, Marquard,
Ricoeur). Vortrag innerhalb der Reihe "Kunst und Psychoanalyse" (Konzept: Karl
Stockreiter) im Institut für Wissenschaft und Kunst/Wien am 25. Juni 1993, in: mvä 4
(2001) Nr.1/März, 42385 Zeichen. /011f4-02.html - <2001b>(trdl.)Mikel Dufrennes
Verteidigung seiner Thèse principale und seiner Thèse sècondaire, = Übersetzung
von: (anon.) Soutenance de thèse, in: Revue de la Métaphysique et de Morale 58
(1953), 432-436. Mit freundlicher Genehmigung der Revue de la Métaphysique et de
Morale, in: mvä 4 (2001) Nr.1/März, 22036 Zeichen. /011f4-13.html. For Mahr 2002
ff. go to „10 Peter Mahr’s publications (last five years; ten in bold as requested)“
27
 below - MARCUSE 1955Eros and Civilization - MÜNKER/RÖSLER
2000Poststrukturalismus- RANCIÈRE 2002Le ressentiment anti-esthétique -
REICHER 2005Einführung in die philosophische Ästhetik - RESTAINO
1991Storia dell'estetica moderna - RICOEUR 1965De l’interprétation. Essai sur
Freud - ROUDINESCO 1986La bataille de cent ans. Histoire de la psychanalyse en
France.2 1925-1985 - 1993Jacques Lacan. Esquisse d’une vie, histoire d’un système
de pensée - SCHEER 1997Einführung in die philosophische Ästhetik - SCHMITZ
2000Die Unterwelt bewegen. Politik, Psychoanalyse und Kunst in der Philosophie
Julia Kristevas - SCHNEIDER 1996Geschichte der Ästhetik von der Aufklärung bis
zur Postmoderne - SCHRIFT 2006Twentieth-century French Philosophy: key themes
and thinkers - SIM1992Beyond Aesthetics. Confrontations with Poststructuralism
and Postmodernism - TAURECK (ed.) 1988Französische Philosophie im 20.
Jahrhundert. Analysen, Texte, Kommentare - TURKLE 1978Psychoanalysis and
Politics: Freud’s French Revolution - WALDENFELS 1983Phänomenologie in
Frankreich - WILLIAMS 2005Understanding poststructuralism - WILLY 1899Die
Krisis der Psychologie - WOLLHEIM 1971Sigmund Freud - WITTGENSTEIN
1967Conversations on Freud - WUCHERER-HULDENFELD 1994aDas
Philosophische im Denken Sigmund Freuds. Vorlesungen an der Universität Wien,
gehalten im Winter-Semester 1987/88 - 1994b Philosophisches im Denken Sigmund
Freuds, Ursprüngliche Erfahrung und personales Sein. Ausgewählte philosophische
Studien I - ZIMMERMANN 1996Ästhetik.

© PD Dr. Peter Mahr, Vienna 2007/2009

28

View publication stats